naturerecordists
[Top] [All Lists]

Comparison Test Zoom H4, Hi-MD & SD722 (was any further comments?

Subject: Comparison Test Zoom H4, Hi-MD & SD722 (was any further comments?
From: "Rob Danielson" danielson_rob
Date: Thu Dec 14, 2006 7:18 pm ((PST))
Hi--  Thanks to Tom Bamberger who loaned me his new unit, I was able
to run this test:

QuickTime Movie (IMA:4 compressed sound)
http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/mediafiles/H4_744_NH700_Com=
pare_Sm.mov
(8mb)
Caution, the recording is loud. Adjust sound level to a comfortable level

QuickTime Movie (uncompressed 16/48K sound)
http://www.uwm.edu/~type/audio-art-tech-gallery/mediafiles/H4_744_NH700_Com=
pareLrg.mov
(12.5mb)

No QuickTimeVideo Player? Use this free player for Mac or PC:
http://www.videolan.org/vlc/

The test compares files created sound files created with maximum mic
pre gain with one set of very low-noise Rode NT1-A mics used on all
three recorders:

Sound Devices 722: ($2400 USD)
Sony NH700 HI-MD Recorder ($115-$160 USD) used with Art Phantom II
unit to provide 48V phantom power for the Rode condenser mics ($50
USD)
Zoom H4 Recorder ($300 USD) (tested with internal phantom power on
and with the Art as well)

I use high mic pre gain to simulate recording ambience in very quiet
natural settings. The differences in noise performance between the
recorders/pres would be much less noticeable in loud settings.  The
playback levels for the recordings have been adjusted to match as
close as I can judge by ear. The files produced by the 722 required
12dB boost to match those of the Hi-MD recorder and the files
produced by the Zoom H4 required 19dB boost.

I also noted:

1) The H4's headphone amp is weaker than most recorders I've used.

2) The whines produced in 44/16 and 48/24 record modes (and on the
test) seem to be consistent with other reports. There may be a
firmware fix for this, but I couldn't find one in brief search.

3) I did the test three times and had sound file corruption problems
with some takes in all three tests. I was off-loading to Mac OSX
Message: 10.
Subject: 3.4 via an SD card reader.

4) The phantom unit was able to supply enough power to operate two
8ma mics. With the NT1-A's used in the test (2ma current), there was
a residual "fizz" from time to time-- most often in the first 1-2
minutes after power-up.

5) A test comparing the H4's built-in mic with other popular electret
mics  on Hi-MD is forthcoming. The H4 lacks PIP.

Hope this addresses some of the questions people have been raising. Rob D.



At 8:24 AM +0000 12/14/06, Roger Norwood wrote:
>Talking of mic amps Klas, you were playing with a Zoom H4,
>have I missed your evaluation somewhere?
>cheers
>BigRog
>
>Roger Norwood
>
>



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Comparison Test Zoom H4, Hi-MD & SD722 (was any further comments?, Rob Danielson <=
Admin

The University of NSW School of Computer and Engineering takes no responsibility for the contents of this archive. It is purely a compilation of material sent by many people to the naturerecordists mailing list. It has not been checked for accuracy nor its content verified in any way. If you wish to get material removed from the archive or have other queries about the archive e-mail Andrew Taylor at this address: andrewt@cse.unsw.EDU.AU